Language/Action Meets Organisational Semiotics: Situating Conversations with Norms

Virtual professional communities require a strong co-evolution of their social and information systems. To ensure that the evolutionary process of their socio-technical systems is viable, a legitimate user-driven specification process is required. Such a process helps to ensure the meaningfulness and acceptability of specification changes. A specification method supporting this process should be grounded in the neo-humanist paradigm so that subjectivist and conflict aspects receive proper attention. Two related subfields of information science that have roots in this paradigm are the Language/Action Perspective (LAP) and organisational semiotics (OS). The RENISYS method for specification of the socio-technical systems of virtual professional communities is presented. It combines aspects from both LAP and OS, by building on work done in the DEMO (LAP) and MEASUR (OS) methodologies. It thus provides an operationalization of neo-humanist ideals that can help to extend theoretical and empirical research.

[1]  Ole Hanseth,et al.  Integrating information systems: the importance of contexts , 1994 .

[2]  Fred P. Brooks,et al.  The Mythical Man-Month , 1975, Reliable Software.

[3]  Peter Aiken,et al.  Information systems development and data modeling: Conceptual and philosophical foundations , 1997 .

[4]  James R. Taylor.  The Limits Of Rationality In Communication Modeling - A SOCIO-SEMIOTIC REINTERPRETATION OF THE CONCE , 1998 .

[5]  Setrag Khoshafian,et al.  Introduction to Groupware, Workflow, and Workgroup Computing , 1995 .

[6]  Terry Winograd,et al.  The Action Workflow Approach to Workflow Management Technology , 1993, Inf. Soc..

[7]  Hans Weigand,et al.  Formalization and rationalization of communication , 1997 .

[8]  Ronald K. Stamper,et al.  Social norms in requirements analysis: an outline of MEASUR , 1994 .

[9]  R. Peterson,et al.  Facilitating the evolution of electronic healthcare networks: Framing the changing socio-technical system , 2001 .

[10]  Ikujiro Nonaka,et al.  The `ART' of knowledge:: Systems to capitalize on market knowledge , 1998 .

[11]  J. Kohnen,et al.  Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organizations , 1997 .

[12]  L. Suchman.  Do categories have politics? The language/action perspective reconsidered , 1993 .

[13]  Ronald K. Stamper,et al.  New directions for systems analysis and design , 2000 .

[14]  Michael S. H. Heng,et al.  Users and designers as partners ‐ design method and tools for user participation and designer accountability within the design process , 1996, Inf. Syst. J..

[15]  Stephen L. Talbott,et al.  The future does not compute - transcending the machines in our midst , 1995 .

[16]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  On the success of speech acts and negotiating commitments , 1996 .

[17]  Terry Winograd,et al.  Understanding computers and cognition - a new foundation for design , 1987 .

[18]  Yair Wand,et al.  Theoretical foundations for conceptual modelling in information systems development , 1995, Decis. Support Syst..

[19]  R. K. Stamper,et al.  Language and computing in organised behaviour , 1991 .

[20]  A. de Moor,et al.  Empowering communities: A method for the legitimate user-driven specification of network information systems , 1999 .

[21]  Jan L. G. Dietz,et al.  Modelling business processes for the purpose of redesign , 1994, Business Process Re-Engineering.

[22]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Information Systems Development and Data Modeling: Philosophical Foundations , 1995 .

[23]  Jr. Frederick P. Brooks,et al.  The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Softw , 1978 .

[24]  Hans Weigand,et al.  A language/action perspective on cooperative information agents , 1996 .

[25]  Giorgio De Michelis,et al.  Situating conversations within the language/action perspective: the Milan conversation model , 1994, CSCW '94.

[26]  Peter Bernus,et al.  Handbook on Architectures of Information Systems , 1999 .

[27]  Geraldine Fitzpatrick,et al.  Process Support: Inflexible Imposition or Chaotic Composition? , 1995, Interact. Comput..

[28]  Rudy Hirschheim,et al.  Realizing Emancipatory Principles in Information Systems Development: The Case for ETHICS , 1994, MIS Q..

[29]  V. E. Van Reijswoud,et al.  The structure of business communication : Theory, model and application , 1996 .

[30]  Thomas Schael,et al.  Workflow Management Systems for Process Organisations , 1998, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[31]  R. Stamper.  Signs, Information, Norms and Systems , 1996 .

[32]  D. Engelbart.  TOWARD HIGH-PERFORMANCE ORGANIZATIONS: A STRATEGIC ROLE FOR GROUPWARE , 1992 .

[33]  Stephen K. White.  The Recent Work of Jürgen Habermas: Reason, Justice and Modernity , 1990 .

[34]  Manfred A. Jeusfeld,et al.  Making Workflow Change Acceptable , 2001, Requirements Engineering.

[35]  E. M. Verharen,et al.  A Language-Action Perspective on the Design of Cooperative Information Agents , 1997 .

[36]  John R. Searle,et al.  Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language , 1970 .

[37]  Martin Smits,et al.  Exploring IT-Enabled Networked Organisations in Health Care: Emerging Practices and Phases of Development , 2000, ECIS.

[38]  P. Kidwell,et al.  The mythical man-month: Essays on software engineering , 1996, IEEE Annals of the History of Computing.